tailingshttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/10700/all
enMount Polley: A Wake-Up Call For Canada’s Mining Industry http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/26/mount-polley-wake-call-canada-s-mining-industry
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Mount%20Polley%20Mine%2C%20Quesnel%20Lake%2C%20Tailings%20Pond%20Sediment.jpg?itok=3yK9f5iS" width="200" height="150" alt="Mount Polley Mine Spill" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><em>This is a guest post by David Suzuki.</em></p>
<p>When a tailings pond broke at the Mount Polley gold and copper mine in south-central B.C., spilling millions of cubic metres of waste into a salmon-bearing stream, <span class="caps">B.C.</span> Energy and Mines Minister Bill Bennett called it an “extremely rare” occurrence, the first in 40 years for mines operating here.</p>
<p>He failed to mention the <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Liberals+keeping+dangerous+occurrences+tailings+ponds+secret/10131898/story.html">46 “dangerous or unusual occurrences” </a>that B.C’s chief inspector of mines reported at tailings ponds in the province between 2000 and 2012, as well as breaches at non-operating mine sites.</p>
<p>This spill was predictable. Concerns were raised about Mount Polley before the breach. <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mount-polley-mine-tailings-pond-breach-followed-years-of-government-warnings-1.2728591"><span class="caps">CBC</span> reported</a> that B.C.’s Environment Ministry issued several warnings about the amount of water in the pond to mine owner Imperial Metals.</p>
<p>With 50 mines operating in <span class="caps">B.C.</span> — and many others across Canada — we can expect more incidents, unless we reconsider how we’re extracting resources.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>Sudden and severe <a href="http://www.miningwatch.ca/publications/two-million-tonnes-day-mine-waste-primer">failure is a risk for all large tailings dams</a> — Mount Polley’s waste pond covered about four square kilometres, roughly the size of Vancouver’s Stanley Park. As higher-grade deposits become increasingly scarce, mining companies are opting for lower-grade alternatives that create more tailings. As tailings ponds grow bigger and contain more water and waste than ever before, they also become riskier. The average height of a Canadian tailings dam doubled from 120 metres in the 1960s to 240 metres today. <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2014/08/07/Risky-Rise-of-Dams/">Alberta writer Andrew Nikiforuk</a> likens increasing mining industry risks to those of the oil sands.</p>
<blockquote style="border: 2px solid #666; padding: 10px; background-color: #ccc;">
Like what you're reading? Help us bring you more. <a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1341606466/lets-clean-up-canadas-climate-and-energy-debate">Click here to support DeSmog Canada's Kickstarter campaign</a> to clean up the climate and energy debate in Canada.</blockquote>
<p>Open ponds of toxic slurry aren’t the best way to manage mining waste. Although there’s no silver-bullet solution, and more research funding on alternative technologies is needed, smaller underground mines are finding safer ways to deal with waste by backfilling tailings. Drying tailings or turning them to a paste before containment are two other options. Safer solutions cost more, making them less popular with profit-focused corporations. But surely B.C.’s $8-billion mining industry can afford to pay more for public and environmental safety.</p>
<p>The government allows the mining industry to choose the cheapest way to deal with waste, and <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Imperial+Metals+insurance+likely+enough+collapse+cleanup/10105163/story.html">companies often lack adequate insurance</a> to cover cleanup costs when accidents happen. Imperial Metals admits its insurance will likely fall far short of what’s required to repair the damage at Mount Polley.</p>
<p>The mining industry and provincial and federal governments must do a better job of managing risks. But how can this happen when we’re facing unprecedented dismantling of Canada’s environmental regulations and decreased funding for monitoring and enforcement?</p>
<p>Although the <span class="caps">B.C.</span> government rightly appointed an independent panel of three top mining engineers to review the cause of the Mount Polley breach and report back with recommendations, the lack of an environmental or cultural perspective on the panel makes it unlikely we’ll see meaningful industry reform. And even the most thorough reviews remain ineffective without implementation commitments — a point made clear by the federal government’s failure to act on the Cohen Commission’s 75 recommendations on the decline of Fraser River sockeye.</p>
<p>Canada’s mining industry must also work more closely with First Nations, some of which are <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mount-polley-mine-spill-fallout-neskonlith-deliver-ruddock-eviction-notice-red-chris-blockade-continues-1.2736711">challenging industrial activity</a> in their territories. The Tahltan blockaded Imperial Metals’ nearly completed mine in the Sacred Headwaters, and the Neskonlith Indian Band issued an eviction notice to an Imperial subsidiary, which proposed an underground lead-and-zinc mine in Secwepemc Territory in the <span class="caps">B.C.</span> Interior. With the Supreme Court’s Tsilhqot'in decision affirming First Nations’ rights to land and resources within their traditional territories, we’re likely to see more defending their lands against mining and other resource extractions.</p>
<p>The Mount Polley tailings spill threatens two of B.C.’s most valued resources: salmon and water. As one of the largest sockeye runs enters the waterways to spawn, we must wait to find out the long-term repercussions for Polley Lake, Quesnel Lake and aquatic life further downstream.</p>
<p>This disaster has eroded public trust in the mining industry and regulations governing it. If risks are too high and long-term solutions unavailable or too expensive, the only way to ensure that toxic tailings are kept out of our precious waterways and pristine landscapes may be to avoid mining in some areas altogether.</p>
<p>As the government rallying cry of “world-class safety standards” echoes in our ears, it’s time we lived up to our self-proclaimed reputation.</p>
<p><em>Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Communications Specialist Jodi Stark.</em></p>
<p><em>Learn more at <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org">www.davidsuzuki.org</a>.</em></p>
<p><span style="font-size:11px;"><em>Image credit: <a href="http://desmog.ca/2014/08/14/photos-i-went-mount-polley-mine-spill-site">Photo by Carol Linnitt. Sludge from the spill carries out into Quesnel Lake</a>. </em></span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17762">Mount Polley</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3602">mining</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10700">tailings</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6232">Spill</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17501">Imperial Metals</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1170">David Suzuki</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10255">salmon</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6550">arsenic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6697">Mercury</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2740">first nations</a></div></div></div>Tue, 26 Aug 2014 23:35:18 +0000Guest8408 at http://www.desmogblog.comDebunked: Eight Things the U.S. State Keystone XL Report Got Wrong About the Alberta Oilsandshttp://desmog.ca/2014/03/11/debunked-8-things-us-state-department-keystone-xl-report-wrong-alberta-oilsands
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/kk%20tar%20sands%20towers.jpg?itok=jUCib5_Y" width="200" height="300" alt="kris krug oilsands tar sands" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Last week the Alberta government responded to the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> State Department's <a href="http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/221135.pdf">final supplemental environmental impact statement</a> (<span class="caps">FSEIS</span>) on the Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> project by emphasizing the province's responsibility, transparency, and confidence that the pipeline is in the “national interest” of both Canada and the <span class="caps">U.S.</span><br /><br />
In a statement, Alberta Premier Alison Redford appealed to the relationship between the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> and Canada. Premier Redford pointed out that the <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> had “recognized the work we're doing to protect the environment,” saying that “the approval of Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> will build upon the deep relationship between our countries and enable further progress toward a stronger, cleaner and more stable North American economy.”<br /><br />
Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Minister Robin Campbell also issued a statement, mentioning Alberta's “strong regulatory system” and “stringent environmental monitoring, regulation and protection legislation.”</p>
<p>Campbell's reminder that the natural resource sector “provides jobs and opportunities for families and communities across the country” was similar to Premier Redford's assurance that “our government is investing in families and communities,” with no mention made of corporate interests.<br /><br />
In order to provide a more specific and sciene-based response to the <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> report on Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span>, <a href="http://www.pembina.org/">Pembina Institute</a> policy analyst Andrew Read provided counterpoints to several of its central claims.</p>
<!--break-->
<p><strong>1. Oilsands Emissions</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/emissions_0.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">U.S.</span> State Department's report claims that “Alberta's oil sands account for about 5 per cent of Canada's overall <span class="caps">GHG</span> emissions and Canada is responsible for about 2 per cent of global emissions.”</p>
<p>Read says that “oilsands are the fastest growing source of emissions in Canada,” and industry and government have been unable to curtail rising emissions in contrast to other industrial sectors. <a href="https://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/A07ADAA2-E349-481A-860F-9E2064F34822/NationalInventoryReportGreenhouseGasSourcesAndSinksInCanada19902011.pdf">Emissions in 2011</a> from mining and oil and gas extraction were up 450 per cent from 1990 levels, 200 per cent from 2000 levels and 93 per cent from 2005 levels. These rising numbers are “primarily attributable to oilsands expansion and transportaion emissions” according to federal reports, says Read.<br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> mentions the Climate Change and Emissions Management Act, passed in 2003, as establishing mandatory annual <span class="caps">GHG</span> intensity reduction targets for large industrial <span class="caps">GHG</span> emitters. But these targets have only been around since 2007 with the passing of Specified Gas Emitters Regulation.<br /><br /><strong>2. Carbon Capture and Storage</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/CCS.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The report mentions that the Alberta government has devoted $2 billion to fund “four large-scale <span class="caps">CCS</span> [Carbon Capture and Storage] projects,” with two involving oilsands producers. The Alberta government has actually committed to spending around $1.4 billion to support the two <span class="caps">CCS</span> projects involving oilsands upgrading. The projects are only expected to reduce 2.6 million tonnes of <span class="caps">CO</span>2 annually, not 15.2 million tonnes, as claimed by the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> State Department.</p>
<p>For more on Alberta's failed <span class="caps">CCS</span> plans, read <a href="http://desmog.ca/2014/02/12/part-2-government-subsidies-keep-alberta-s-ccs-pipe-dream-afloat">DeSmog Canada's two-part series</a>.<br /><br /><strong>3. In Situ Recovery of Bitumen</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/in%20situ.jpg" style="width: 600px; height: 139px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> claims that 80 per cent of oilsands bitumen is recovered through in situ techniques using <span class="caps">SAGD</span> (Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage), which is “less disturbing to the land surface than surface mining and does not require tailings ponds.”<br /><br />
While 80 per cent of bitumen is too deep to mine, only 50 per cent is currently produced in situ. Furthermore, the <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> ignores the downsides of in situ exploration and development, which disrupts ecosystems by creating “fragmentation of habitats” and “pathways for increased predation,” and is also land intensive. In situ extraction techniques are also more greenhouse gas intensive than mining techniques, and increased production from those sources will ultimately lead to an increase in <span class="caps">GHG</span> emissions.<br /><br /><strong>4. Water Withdrawals</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/kk%20athabasca%201.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> reports that all approved oilsands projects can “withdraw no more than 3 per cent of the average annual flow of the Athabasca River,” with 2008 withdrawals coming to 0.8 per cent of the long-term average annual flow.<br /><br />
Read emphasizes that these numbers are misleading because water withdrawals “are not halted when river flows reach extremely low levels that can result in damage to the Athabasca.” For example, in winter periods when river flows are much lower withdrawals have been seen to reach 15 per cent of river flow. Read says that “comparing withdrawals to average flows masks the seasonal variability that is observed on the river.”<br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> also claims water use by oilsands operations has continued to decrease despite increased production, with many in situ operations recycling up to 90 per cent of water used. But this decrease is only on a “water use per barrel basis,” with total water usage increasing due to expanded production. Furthermore, even water recycled during oilsands operations is permanently removed from the ecosystem, along with the 10 per cent additional water required.<br /><br /><strong>5. Air Quality Monitoring</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/air%20quality%20monitoring.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> claims that long-term air quality monitoring “since 1995 shows improved or no change in <span class="caps">CO</span>, ozone, fine particulate matter, and <span class="caps">SO</span>2, and an increasing trend in <span class="caps">NO</span>2.”</p>
<p>Read notes that over that 10-year period, there has been a lot of fluctuation in the ambient air concentration of these pollutants. Particularly, <span class="caps">NO</span>2 and <span class="caps">SO</span>2 have been seen to spike during certain periods. However, particulate matter “has been <a href="http://environment.alberta.ca/images/PM2.5_avg5.jpg">increasing</a> at certain monitoring sites in the oilsands region.” The Canadian government is also showing elevated levels of fine particulate matter above their own 2015 target in the “prairies and northern Ontario” region which contain the oilsands developments.<br /><br /><strong>6. Tailings</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/kk%20tailings.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> observes that “processing 1 tonne (1.1 tons) of oilsand produces about 94 liters (25 gallons) of Tailings,” to which Read responds that 1.5 barrels of tailings are produced for every barrel of bitumen mined from the oilsands.<br /><br />
The volume of tailings will continue to grow “more than 40 per cent from 830 million cubic metres to more than 1.2 billion cubic metres in 2030,” and will continue to grow until stabilizing at 1.3 billion cubic metres around 2060, says Read.</p>
<p>A recent Environment Canada study found <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/federal-study-says-oil-sands-toxins-are-leaching-into-groundwater-athabasca-river/article17016054/">toxic chemicals from tailings ponds are leaching</a> into groundwater and the Athabasca River.<br /><br /><strong>7. Land Reclamation</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/land%20reclaimation.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> reports that “602 km2 (232 mi2) have been disturbed by oilsands mining activity of which 67 km2 (26 mi2) has been or is in the process of reclamation.”<br /><br />
The <a href="http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/reclamation.html">actual area</a> of land disturbed by oilsands development is 715 square kilometres (71,500 hectares). Out of that, “only 1.04 square kilometres (104 hectares) is certified by the government as reclaimed.” The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span>'s figure is closer to the amount of land unofficially reclaimed (65 square kilometres), but this self-reported claim remains unverified due to “a lack of regulated standards and requirements to reclaim land as further land is disturbed,” says Read.<br /><br />
Read puts the estimated cost of reclaiming the disturbed land, based on available government and industry data, at $10-$15 billion, or approximately $220,000 to $320,000 per hectare.<br /><br /><strong>8. Potential Impacts and Environmental Monitoring</strong></p>
<p><strong><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/tar%20sands%20towers%20emissions.jpg" style="width: 600px;" /></strong><br /><br />
The <span class="caps">FSEIS</span> states that “Alberta has committed to a cumulative effects approach that looks at potential impacts of all projects within a region,” and requires oilsands operations to have plans to “minimize their effects on wildlife and biodiversity.” The report also mentions that the Alberta government “monitors and verifies” that these plans are undertaken.<br /><br />
Alberta and Canada have continued to approve <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/potentially-damaging-jackpine-oilsands-mine-expansion-ok-d-by-ottawa-1.2454849">projects</a> that have been shown to have “significant and irreversible” adverse environmental effects through the environmental review process. There are also concerns about the enforcement of these rules. Read points to a <a href="http://vipmedia.globalnews.ca/2013/07/envir_incidents_july-16-2013.pdf">2013 report</a> that surveyed 9,000 reported incidents in the oilsands, and found that “less than one percent of likely environmental infractions drew any enforcement.”</p>
<p><span style="font-size:10px;"><em>Images: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kk/sets/72157629270319399/">Kris Krug</a> via flickr</em></span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone XL</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6584">pipeline</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5648">Report</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15509">FSEIS</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/988">u.s.</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/canada">canada</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2738">oilsands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1165">Alberta</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2327">environment</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5538">bitumen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1976">emissions</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13772">in situ</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2831">ccs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10700">tailings</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15510">particulate matter</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div></div></div>Sat, 15 Mar 2014 21:37:31 +0000Indra Das7913 at http://www.desmogblog.comAthabasca Chipewyan First Nation Challenges Shell in Legal Hearinghttp://www.desmogblog.com/2012/10/23/athabasca-chipewyan-first-nation-challenge-shell-legal-hearing
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Picture%201_6.png?itok=1YzHbdvU" width="181" height="180" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Today the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (<span class="caps">ACFN</span>) is arguing that <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/10/01/first-nation-challenge-shell-canada-s-jackpine-mine-expansion-citing-constitutional-treaty-rights">Shell Canada's proposed expansion of the Jackpine Mine</a> in the tar sands is in violation of constitutionally protected aboriginal rights outlined in Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution and <a href="http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/alberta-tar-sands-illegal-treaty-8-first-nations-shell-oil">Treaty 8, which the <span class="caps">ACFN</span> signed in 1899</a>. Arguments against the proposal will be heard by a provincial-federal Joint Review Panel.</p>
<p>The <span class="caps">ACFN</span> participated in a Fort McMurray rally today, asking for individuals, organizations and communities across Canada to <a href="http://www.facebook.com/events/159030127569651/?ref=ts&amp;fref=ts">stand in solidarity</a> with their tribe. </p>
<p>“We are here today because a legal challenge may be the only remaining piece of law that can stop the destruction of our land,” <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/alberta-first-nation-presents-legal-challenge-of-shells-tar-sands-expansion-as-north-americas-conservation-community-announces-firm-support-2012-10-23">said Allan Adam</a>, chief of the <span class="caps">ACFN</span>. “We are thankful for the mountain of support we've been receiving. People understand the significance of this challenge and what we must do for our land.”</p>
<p>The proposed expansion will increase <a href="http://environment.alberta.ca/documents/Shell_Jackpine_Pierre_PDD.pdf">Jackpine Mine</a>'s production capacity from 200,000 barrels per day (bbl/d) to 300,000 bbl/d and will extend the mine's lifespan to 2049.<br /><br />
The project will add 1.8 million tonnes of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, roughly the equivalent of 280,000 additional cars on the road. The waste from the expanded project will amount to some 486 billion litres of liquid tailings including mercury, arsenic and lead, which Shell proposes to permanently bury in what is called a '<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/10/04/oil-industry-looks-create-lake-district-open-pit-mines-and-toxic-tar-sands-waste">pit lake</a>,' according to a <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/alberta-first-nation-presents-legal-challenge-of-shells-tar-sands-expansion-as-north-americas-conservation-community-announces-firm-support-2012-10-23">press release</a>.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>The numerous environmental and human health risks associated with the proposal, outlined in <a href="http://www.pembina.org/pub/2378">this Pembina Institute report</a>, include threats to wildlife, wetlands, forests, air quality, acid deposition, climate change and water use.</p>
<p>Since the <span class="caps">ACFN</span> announced their opposition to the project, the Joint Review Panel and Shell Canada received over <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/alberta-first-nation-presents-legal-challenge-of-shells-tar-sands-expansion-as-north-americas-conservation-community-announces-firm-support-2012-10-23">50,000 public comments</a> from individuals and organizations across Canada and the United States. </p>
<p>“We want the <span class="caps">ACFN</span> to know loud and clear that in challenging Shell's latest tar sands expansion they have the full support from North America's conservation community,” <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/alberta-first-nation-presents-legal-challenge-of-shells-tar-sands-expansion-as-north-americas-conservation-community-announces-firm-support-2012-10-23">said Keith Stewart</a>, climate and energy campaign coordinator at Greenpeace Canada.</p>
<p>Mashi Cho, who attended the hearings, published this statement on the <a href="http://acfnchallenge.wordpress.com/"><span class="caps">ACFN</span> website:</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>“I am sitting in a room in Fort McMurray listening to our lawyers argue about the need to protect our constitutionally protected rights to fish, hunt, and trap – rights that are being threatened by the expansion of the tar sands and specifically the Shell Jackpine Mine. We have been here before – in courtrooms, government offices, and the boardroom of Shell Canada – trying to protect our traditional way of life and the spirit of our community. But this time it is different because we are not alone. Today over 50 conservation and social justice groups along with many First Nations have come out in support of our efforts. Over 50,000 people have voiced their opposition to the Shell mine and as I write this there is a bus full of supporters making their way from Edmonton to join us. Facebook is littered with postings expressing support for the <span class="caps">ACFN</span>. We are honoured.</em></p>
<div>
<em>The oil companies have more money then we can ever dream of. They can out spend us at every turn, make more ads, and pay more experts. But we have the passion of our people, our culture, our Treaty, the Canadian Constitution, and the truth on our side. And with the outpouring of support that is coming in from all corners of Canada and the <span class="caps">US</span>, we will confront Big Oil and protect our land and our rights. We are not alone.”</em></div>
</blockquote>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Yesterday Lubicon Cree member <a href="http://nobelwomensinitiative.org/2012/10/meet-melina-laboucan-massimo-indigenous-environmental-activist/">Melina Laboucan Massimo</a> spoke about the Jackpine Mine at the Defend Our Coast Rally in Victoria, British Columbia. Here is her powerful call for support of the <span class="caps">ACFN</span> in front of thousands of individuals gathered at the sit-in.</div>
<div>
<object allowfullscreen="&quot;true&quot;&gt;&lt;/embed&gt;&lt;/object&gt;&lt;/div" allowscriptaccess="&quot;always&quot;" height="&quot;309&quot;&gt;&lt;param" name="&quot;movie&quot;" src="&quot;https://www.youtube.com/v/KC4ut_kGibc?version=3&amp;amp;hl=en_US&quot;" type="&quot;application/x-shockwave-flash&quot;" value="&quot;https://www.youtube.com/v/KC4ut_kGibc?version=3&amp;amp;hl=en_US&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param" width="&quot;550&quot;"></object></div>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10354">Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10364">ACFN</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10696">Jackpine Mine</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7242">Shell Canada</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10697">Section 35</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10698">Canadian Constitution</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10699">Treaty 8</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10700">tailings</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6280">Waste</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1165">Alberta</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/pembina-institute">pembina institute</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10701">Melina Laboucan Massimo</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10702">Defend Our Coast</a></div></div></div>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 01:12:48 +0000Carol Linnitt6606 at http://www.desmogblog.com